Don’t worry we are doing GREAT!

[Anonymous]

[quote=spdrun]$7.25/hr = about $14000/yr before taxes = $1166/mo. Let’s assume that you somehow pay no tax…

Room = $600/mo min in NYC
Health insurance = $200/mo minimum
That leaves $366/mo for everything else?

You try living/eating/commuting on $12.20/day in the US.[/quote]

Also, at that income level, if you were an American citizen you would certainly qualify for all kinds of government subsidies such as food stamps, government housing, etc. so your calculations are worse than reality. Yet somehow illegal immigrants manage to survive without those benefits (at least those without anchor babies won’t get those benefits) and even manage to have money left over to send home as remittances.

[The-Shoveler]

Once again

I guess the question is ????

Do you want a larger and larger part of your population to live like that and a smaller and smaller middle class (as seems to be the trend).

[The-Shoveler]

It’s very simple, the majority of middle class Jobs are NEVER COMING BACK.

they will be replace by a lot fewer high tech jobs that pay well and service jobs that don’t quite get you to the middle class again.

[flyer]

I wonder if it’s really a question of “what we want,” versus, a confluence of events (some, beyond our control), that have irreversibly positioned us (as a country) in a situation where the financial “winners” in life will slowly, but surely diminish in number?

My wife is an exec in the film business, and we were having this very conversation with regard to a film she has worked on recently. “Elysium” presents a very thought-provoking scenario of what may or may not be in our future. (This is not an endorsement, merely a comment pertaining to the topic of this thread.)

[CA renter]

[quote=flyer]I wonder if it’s really a question of “what we want,” versus, a confluence of events (some, beyond our control), that have irreversibly positioned us (as a country) in a situation where the financial “winners” in life will slowly, but surely diminish in number?

My wife is an exec in the film business, and we were having this very conversation with regard to a film she has worked on recently. “Elysium” presents a very thought-provoking scenario of what may or may not be in our future. (This is not an endorsement, merely a comment pertaining to the topic of this thread.)[/quote]

It is not at all irreversible, though that is the meme they are trying to push. The few at the top who are amassing more and more power and wealth most certainly do not want to change it, but we CAN change it. Whether or not we have the collective intelligence and fortitude to do so is another question.

[flyer]

I hope you’re right, CAR.

In the meantime, we’re trying to make sure our immediate and extended family are well taken care of–just in case “collective intelligence and fortitude” does not prevail.

[livinincali]

[quote=flyer]I wonder if it’s really a question of “what we want,” versus, a confluence of events (some, beyond our control), that have irreversibly positioned us (as a country) in a situation where the financial “winners” in life will slowly, but surely diminish in number?

My wife is an exec in the film business, and we were having this very conversation with regard to a film she has worked on recently. “Elysium” presents a very thought-provoking scenario of what may or may not be in our future. (This is not an endorsement, merely a comment pertaining to the topic of this thread.)[/quote]

Doesn’t America already look like Elysium to a 3rd world rice paddy farmer. It depends on your perspective. I won’t argue that the natural state of an economy tends to concentrate wealth at the top, but if left to it’s own devices that concentration of wealth will collapse on it’s own. It’s when governments protect/bailout large monopolies that we are left with long lasting periods of concentrations of power. During the great depression wealth inequality declined.

It’s the choices we’ve made to bail out the wealthy over the years that has increased the wealth gap more than anything. Of course retirements and pensions depend on maintaining that wealth gap.

If there were no low income housing, no section 8, no rent control would rents be higher or lower. Would companies and landlords have to adjust their rents and wages to some level where people would be able to work in the area and afford to live there. The answer would likely be yes but those holding assets and those owning businesses probably wouldn’t like that solution very much. They’d rather fight over another government program that maintains their place in society and places the resulting burden on somebody else.

[The-Shoveler]

Don’t know about most locations,
But in Ocean Side all the trailer parks would probably be gone without rent control.

In Santa Monica The landlords would elect you president.

No one enjoyed the great depression.

I don’t think anyone who lived through that would recommend it.

[The-Shoveler]

Duplicate

[FlyerInHi]

I saw the preview for Elysium. It’s got to do with health care and how desperate the protagonists are to save their loved ones.

It’s already Elysium. Most middle class don’t realize it yet but if they are not lucky enough to have good lifetime insurance, they are screwed.

For example a freelance actor who maybe makes good money at times, but is in between jobs and has no health insurance. He gets sick and has to spend into poverty before he gets Medicaid.

You guys may be surprised that Medicaid is not so much for the poor but to pay the nursing home bills of the middle class.

Maybe obamacare will change things but, as things stand now, don’t get a major wildly expensive to treat chronic disease without insurance.

Did you notice how goodlooking and healthy the rich are on TV, even in their 70s? Compare to the general population.

[FlyerInHi]

Deadzone, people don’t really plan to have kids especially if they have no money to pay for contraception (or they use that money for a cell phone instead). They have recreational sex and oops baby is conceived.

Free contraception and family planning is the best way to prevent poverty. That’s where government is failing.

[SD Realtor]

I don’t buy it anymore. There have been programs in place for decades now. Condoms cost a few bucks at most.

People do what they are gonna do. Plenty…PLENTY of people who shouldn’t have kids have kids knowing full well how to prevent pregnancy AND knowing full well of the cost.

Yet they still do it.

[spdrun]

I read that teen pregnancy rates are actually going down, so maybe anything like that needs a generation or two to work…

[FlyerInHi]

I’ve come to realize that people are not that responsible unless they have parents or peers watching over them.

People will do what will give them pleasure at the time. They won’t think too far ahead so you have to make it easy for them.

I agree that we should insist on responsibility whenever possible but oftentimes that insistence is counter to the public good. Contraception is one example.

Contraception is virtually free but you have to overcome too many obstacles to get it. How is a woman on minimum wage and no health insurance supposed to get a prescription for the pill? Can she even take the time off to see the doctor?

Give contraception away at the local school. The data show that it works in developing countries. We should make it work here.

How are women supposed to abort unwanted pregnancies if there are only 5 abortion clinics in a whole state? Put 1 in every neighborhood and give away contraception like Halloween candy.

My theory is that personal responsibility is negatively correlated to addiction and cravings (food, sex, alcohol, drugs, etc). People with means or parents with means can overcome addictions more easily.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=FlyerInHi]
Did you notice how goodlooking and healthy the rich are on TV, even in their 70s? Compare to the general population.[/quote]

Have you noticed how in person, they’re not?

[Author]

Posts